PNCOPERF 1A (Rating Summary Form)

POLICE NON-COMMISSIONED OFFICER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REPORT

FOR Pat TO PSSg (FIRST LEVEL)
Rating Period: January 1 to June 30, 2019
1. Ratee’s Name 2. Rank
PALISOC PREMIER HAROLD TABUÑAR Police Staff Sergeant
(Last Name) (Given Name) (Middle Name)
3. Position/Designation 3. Unit Assignment/Station/District
Action PNCO, Logistics Section - ITMS PNP-ITMS
5. Years and Months in Current Position: 1 yr. 2 mos.
Point Numerical Weighted
PARTS DIMENSIONS PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Allocation Rating Score
a. Quality of work 7 x 5 = 35
Output
b. Timeliness of work 6 x 5 = 30
(25 pts)
I. c. Acceptability of output based on standard 6 x 5 = 30
d. Accomplishment of target 6 x 5 = 30

a. Understanding of the job description 2 x 5 = 10

b. Awareness of the Vision, mission and objectives of the 2 x 5 = 10
organization
c. Community Oriented Policing System 5 x 4 = 20
Job Knowledge
d. Creativity/Resourcefulness 2 x 5 = 10
(25 points)
II. e. Analytical Ability 2 x 4 = 8
f. Ability to solve problems/troubleshooting 2 x 5 = 10
C g. Oral and written communication 5 x 5 = 25
O h. Law Enforcement and Maintenance of Law and Order 5 x 5 = 25
R
E a. Records Management & Submission of Reports 3 x 5 = 15
b. Compliance with and Implementation of 3 x 5 = 15
C Policies/SOPs
Work
O
Management c. Sense of Priority 2 x 5 = 10
M
(15 points) d. Client Satisfaction/Orientation 3 x 4 = 12
P
E e. Cost effectiveness 2 x 5 = 10
T f. Involvement/Presence in Activities 2 X 5 = 10
E
N a. Receptive to ideas/suggestions 3 x 4 = 12
C Interpersonal b. Teamwork Management 3 X 4 = 12
I Relationship c. Build Linkages and networks 3 X 5 = 15
E (15 points) d. Ability to lead and follow 3 X 5 = 15
S e. Motivation 3 X 5 = 15

Concern for the a. Stewardship of unit’s properties 3 X 5 = 15

Organization b. Preservation of unit interest 3 X 5 = 15
(10 points) c. Coordination 4 X 4 = 16

Personal Trait  Personal Trait 

Morally Upright 1 Civic-minded 1
Honest 1 Responsible 1
Personal 10.0 x 50 = 50
III. Qualities Well groomed 1 Disciplined 1
(10 points) Fair and Just 1 Courteous/tactful 1
Loyal to the organization 1 Initiate positive action 1
Nr of Traits with Check Marks
TOTAL WEIGHTED SCORE (TWS) 450
NUMERICAL PERFORMANCE RATING (NPR) = TWS ÷ 5 90
EQUIVALENT ADJECTIVAL PERFORMANCE RATING (APR) (Please refer to NPR-APR Table) “VS”
Rater’s Assessment of Ratee: I certify that this report represents my best judgment. [ ] I DO [ ] I DO NOT recommend this
personnel to be granted [ ] promotion [ ] designation to higher position [ ] relief.
This personnel needs improvement on the following:

Significant/Critical Incident(s)

Acknowledged: Conformed: Attested:

PMAJ JERALD M SEVILLA PSSg Premier Harold T. Palisoc PLTCOL NEVI D ALARCIO
RATER RATEE REVIEWER
June 11, 2019 June 11, 2019 June 11, 2019
(Date accomplished) (Date accomplished) (Date accomplished)
(IF REFERRED TO THE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE)

I certify that this report was referred to the Grievance Committee for review and evaluation.

____________________
Signature
Head, Grievance Committee
 GUIDELINES & INSTRUCTIONS IN THE COMPUTATION OF IPER

Three (3) major parts of Performance Evaluation Rating Forms:

1. PART I – Output 2. PART II – Core Competencies 3. PART III – Personal Qualities

a) Parts I & II evaluate the PCO/PNCO by placing the Numerical rating based on the performance Indicators as manifested by the ratee.

Rating Table for Performance Indicators

Numerical Rating Rating Criteria

5 Exceeds standards
4 Always meets standards
3 Occasionally meets standards
2 Seldom meets standards
1 Never meets standards

b) Part III check the box with the traits exhibited by PCO/PNCO.

Rating Table for Personal Traits

Numerical Rating Points of Traits

5 Nine (9) to Ten (10)
4 Seven (7) to Eight (8)
3 Five (5) to Six (6)
2 Three (3) to Four (4)
1 Two (2) or less

c) After rating the PCO/PNCO multiply the point allocation (point allocation is already given in each specific rank) by the numerical rating for
every performance indicator to get the weighted score. To get the numerical performance rating (NPR), add the weighted scores to get the
total weighted score (TWS) and divide the sum by 5. To translate the numerical performance rating (APR), please be guided on the conversion
table below:

NPR-APR Table

Numerical Performance Adjectival Performance

Rating (NPR) Rating (APR)
91-100 Outstanding (OS)
81-90.99 Very Satisfactory (VS)
71-80.99 Satisfactory (SF)
70.99 Poor (PR)

d) Significant/critical incident/s – fill–up this space to cite Significant/Critical incident/s to support extreme rating (highest OS & lowest
POOR), on a specific performance indicator.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
PROCEDURE FOR RECLAMA

Note: This IPER form should be properly accomplished/filled out & must be done in four (4) original forms (Rank specified) without any
erasures or alterations. 1 for personnel/ratee, 1 for the Office where the personnel is assigned, 1 for the Administrative Office, 1 for DPRM
(Attn: PPPD).

Pursuant to Chapter 4 para 4.2 & 4.3 of PCO/PNCOPER System Manual.

All PCOs/PNCOs shall fully abide by & willfully promote adherence to the IPER system as this shall be used in a highly objective
assessment of individual performance that contribute to the attainment of PNP mission & vision. The IPER shall be a basis in the assignment or
reassignment, promotion or attrition and training skills enhancement of personnel.

The ratee, rater & reviewer shall observe the proper filling of entries, rating according to the performance indicators, numerical ratings
to be given the equivalent adjectival rating following the procedure on IPER system affixing their signature & indicating the date opposite or
below their names.

“ A ratee who conforms with his/her rating, shall affix his/her signature and the date on his/her rating report within two (2) working
days from receipt, and shall forward it to the reviewer.

“ A ratee who disagrees with the rater must submit a written request for a review of rating to the reviewer, copy furnish the rater
not later than FIVE (5) DAYS from receipt or tender of rating, Chapter 3.1.2 para “b” of PCO/PNCOPER System Manual.

Likewise, rater should also observe the reglementary period to do such corrections/changes is specified in Chapter 3.1.2. para “c”;
that if the disagreement stands after clarificatory meeting called by the reviewer, the ratee must appeal within FIVE (5) DAYS, after the
meeting, copy furnish the rater and reviewer to the grievance committee.

GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE (Chapter 5)

5.1.1 There shall be created grievance committee in every office/unit. The Grievance Committee shall review evaluate and render
a final decision on the appeal filed by the ratee within thirty (30) days from receipt of the Committee.

5.1.2 The Composition of the Committee are the following:

a) Head of the office/unit who shall act as Chairman or his duly representative
b) Five (5) designated PCO staff and
c) Senior PNCO as members

In no case shall the rater and reviewer be designated as members of the Grievance Committee. The decision of the Grievance
Committee shall be final and executory.